If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

He, at least, seem interested in a 3 person relationship. While I am hetero, it doesn't seem a bad idea, if all the persons involved are willing.
Well, as much as PC characters can be willing, actually. ;-)

Idea is great, and I really like it, but realization isn't good. When Regongar (or Octavia) proposes sex, he asks Octavia to join, without asking PC if they agree on it.

And it's really adds to the problem, if you don't want a poly romance. He can ask another characters, Tristian for example, to have sex with him only, without Octavia, but for PC he ask for threesome. It would be better if PC could ask for Octavia to join them.

I have three big issues with their romances:
1. It's not really "bisexual with optional threesome" and more like "poly romance with optional same sex romance"
2. It's not really true that "At the game's start Octavia and Regongar are a couple on the verge of breaking up." At game's start Octavia just a little annoyed, that calling her mine.
3. It's hard for character with good alignment to start romance with Regongar options according PC alignment. It is easier to start poly romance in this case, then romance with him only without Octavia joining up.

Gays and lesbians have only one option and both are a couple and you need to break them up even if they are on the verge of breaking up.

Hmmm... We lgbtq folk are very used to this kind of narrative, seriously. Dont try to make the OP the bad guy here =)

Bad? She said she "just asked a simple question" and all I did was pointing out that "simple question" would be "where can I find those companions?", while lengthy post about deliberate insult of "you lgbtq folk" from evil developers is a) not a question, b) unfair, since that option was included and is arguably better.

Bad? She said she "just asked a simple question" and all I did was pointing out that "simple question" would be "where can I find those companions?", while lengthy post about deliberate insult of "you lgbtq folk" from evil developers is a) not a question, b) unfair, since that option was included and is arguably better.

I never said the developers were evil. I'm not asking for it to be changed or saying that the devs are evil. You'll notice my praise throughout the original- I'm over 50 hours into this game and loving it. They put a lot of work into a game concept I never imagined was ever going to happen, and I appreciate that. I was pointing out the flaws in having a product that has romance as a selling point and then making the queer characters harder to get for some reason. I didn't even say it was discriminatory just.... weird and a little bit suspect. If it's not on purpose, which I honestly doubt that it is, then that betrays an unconscious bias, which is something that needs addressing.
I honestly don't want or need special treatment. I understand their story may be different and their romances better written but that's not the point. The point is that the barrier to entry for them is higher, and that's not okay without good reason. I just want to know what they had in mind in writing them that way.

And yeah, this is a video game. I'm not burning my bra or whatever people think "feminists" do in their spare time cuz I'm riled up that I didn't get my easy gay lays. But it's also a fantasy world where I can shoot fireballs out my ass. Why can't I ask for a nice easy queer romance? It's escapism, yeah, but that's why we have games.

@HenriHaki- I'm well aware putting work into a relationship can feel extremely rewarding. But again, it's weird that the default option for queer people is the more work option. Why aren't the "easy" and "hard" relationships split between straight and queer options?
Also, as per the post, by the time I discovered this bug, I was not 5 hours in, I was 25 hours in, which made the sunk cost feel worse.
I also understand that there are REAL playability problems that need to be fixed, this is not one of them. I just wanted the devs opinion on whether this was intentional or not. I want to know what kind of story they were hoping to tell here.

I never said the developers were evil. I'm not asking for it to be changed or saying that the devs are evil. You'll notice my praise throughout the original- I'm over 50 hours into this game and loving it. They put a lot of work into a game concept I never imagined was ever going to happen, and I appreciate that. I was pointing out the flaws in having a product that has romance as a selling point and then making the queer characters harder to get for some reason. I didn't even say it was discriminatory just.... weird and a little bit suspect. If it's not on purpose, which I honestly doubt that it is, then that betrays an unconscious bias, which is something that needs addressing.
I honestly don't want or need special treatment. I understand their story may be different and their romances better written but that's not the point. The point is that the barrier to entry for them is higher, and that's not okay without good reason. I just want to know what they had in mind in writing them that way.

And yeah, this is a video game. I'm not burning my bra or whatever people think "feminists" do in their spare time cuz I'm riled up that I didn't get my easy gay lays. But it's also a fantasy world where I can shoot fireballs out my ass. Why can't I ask for a nice easy queer romance? It's escapism, yeah, but that's why we have games.

@HenriHaki- I'm well aware putting work into a relationship can feel extremely rewarding. But again, it's weird that the default option for queer people is the more work option. Why aren't the "easy" and "hard" relationships split between straight and queer options?
Also, as per the post, by the time I discovered this bug, I was not 5 hours in, I was 25 hours in, which made the sunk cost feel worse.
I also understand that there are REAL playability problems that need to be fixed, this is not one of them. I just wanted the devs opinion on whether this was intentional or not. I want to know what kind of story they were hoping to tell here.

So you didn't say it was discriminatory, you just implied it. Now you say it is the result of conscious, or unconscious, bias. I.e. discriminatory. Wonderful. At least own up to your BS.

Maybe not every character is gay, you know? Maybe the developers set out to create believeable characters to fit their vision and theme and THEN, the characters having already been created and fitted, their orientations set, they asked themselves: Who of these should be romanceable and how?

If you want developers to consider romance as a cornerstone of characters, moreso than theme and believeability, and rewrite because of it, then you're way off base and embody why everyone is stigmatising and parodying LQBT/whatever people on boards like this. Do some soul searching, in that case.

Looks like this thread rapidly descended into internet fights based on assumptions about what the other side is trying to imply.

Back to the main topic:

In all likelihood, OwlCat's devs ran out of time during content creation process to finish the potential romance options they had available to them. Time has clearly been an issue in other areas -- the bugs, the Technic League without rayguns, the golems that are very clearly dudes in plate armor wearing grey makeup -- so it wouldn't surprise me if a lot of romance sideplots ended up on the chopping block, to be saved for DLC, big patches, and future games.

If that's the case, the romances we have preserved were probably the ones already completed, or the ones most convenient for the devs. I'm kinda betting Reggie and Octavia were created first; they're a fairly unique set, have their own dungeons, and very conveniently allow two romance subplots to function off of the same maps and plot tree, all at the cost of a bit of extra dialogue. Tristian and Valerie were likely safe choices considered afterward; they're both mostly Lawful Good/Neutral (I'm kind of betting more players will choose a Good alignment than an Evil one) and fairly straightforward, with companion quests that actually don't require much in the way of resources (i.e. most of the maps and plots involved in their stories were already planned and in-use).

Please don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that any preference *should* have been chosen because of utility, or that Tristian and Valerie haven't had as much time put into developing their characters. I'm just trying to guess at this from a dev perspective. And from that, there's not really any reason why Valerie or Tristian couldn't also be same-sex love interests... but I'm kind of betting the devs have other characters in mind for that (maybe in a future patch?), and honestly they might come off as a little too stereotypical that way (see the 'coding' message that someone else posted previously).